We performed a comparison between Red Hat Gluster Storage and VMware vSAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about StarWind, Nutanix, Red Hat and others in Software Defined Storage (SDS)."It's very easy to upgrade storage."
"The technical support team is excellent."
"The price tag is good compared to the amount of data and high availability provided."
"We don't have to order a storage system, we can just use whatever we have on hand and roll it into our virtualization system."
"The product’s ecosystem is better than Nutanix’s."
"Easy to deploy and manage."
"The most valuable features are the encryption, deduplication, compression, and the ability to manage all of your storage within your server rack."
"The newer versions of this solution are much more stable and easier to manage."
"Instead of going for SAN storage, customers can use the scale-up and scale-out features of VMware vSAN."
"VMware vSAN is compatible with the legacy hypervisor solutions and most of the features are good."
"Storage policies are used to perform operations in the VMs. This feature allows you to create storage policies for VMs to get performance, high availability, I/O policies, etc."
"The performance of the solution must be improved."
"The user interface could be simplified."
"The system should be more intuitive and easier to manage."
"The biggest room for improvement I see in vSAN is the lack of SAN connectivity. I've kind of joked around that there is no "SAN" in vSAN. And it's something that we've worked to try and introduce some options for, and we're going to continue to work towards that."
"Integration could be better."
"While I like the replication and compression features, there is a problem with them running too slowly."
"It can be very expensive."
"On the DevOps side, if there could be more automation it would be more helpful."
"The product's complex setup phase is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Because of virtual storage, the system reaches reserve storage for its functions. It also consumes a certain amount of storage, which then results in the creation of a fault tolerance for the system. All of this adds to a lot of capacity being consumed in terms of storage for each drive for vSan. I find this to be one drawback of using vSan."
"As a software-based product, it requires a lot of system resources."
Red Hat Gluster Storage is ranked 12th in Software Defined Storage (SDS) with 3 reviews while VMware vSAN is ranked 2nd in HCI with 227 reviews. Red Hat Gluster Storage is rated 7.6, while VMware vSAN is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Red Hat Gluster Storage writes "A scalable and easy-to-implement solution that has an excellent technical support team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware vSAN writes "Very stable, easy to set up, and easy to use". Red Hat Gluster Storage is most compared with Red Hat Ceph Storage, IBM Spectrum Scale, LizardFS, LINBIT SDS and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, whereas VMware vSAN is most compared with VxRail, Microsoft Storage Spaces Direct, HPE SimpliVity, Red Hat Ceph Storage and Dell PowerFlex.
We monitor all Software Defined Storage (SDS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
